Institutions of higher education have long served as bastions of free expression, fostering academic discourse and student activism. However, recent legislative actions in several states threaten to stifle this tradition by curbing free speech within these communities.
Organizers at Arizona State University (ASU) are monitoring the progress of Arizona House Bill 2759, which states that a public institution “may not formally recognize a student organization that … promotes a foreign terrorist organization.” The bill stems from alleged links between some ASU organizations and Hamas, the terrorist group that attacked Israel last October.
Leadership and members of the targeted ASU student organizations refute any connection to Hamas and worry that their right to express support for the Palestinian people will be stifled, or even prevented, by the bill.
A similar bill in Iowa, House Bill 2077, revokes federal financial aid for students “if the attorney general determines that the student has endorsed or promoted terrorism or the actions of any foreign terrorist organization.” The bill’s opponents fear that the legislation could affect eligible students who oppose the Israel-Hamas war.
Indiana House Bill 1179 prohibits higher education institutions “from using state funds or resources” to “engage,” “contract with,” or “support” any adversarial foreign “sources.” Free speech experts theorize that this ambiguous wording could backfire on the stated goal, and activists are concerned that the measures will hinder individuals’ rights to free speech. After conflicts arose between administration and student demonstrators at The University of Texas campuses at Austin and Arlington in March, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed an executive order.— reportedly intended to decrease the tensions across the state’s college campuses — requiring institutions to review their free speech policies, define antisemitism, and implement more punitive consequences for those who violate them.
Those contesting the measure allege that it is antithetical to Abbott’s previous stance on DEI, and that if the order reduces tensions on campuses, it is only because it may be seen as essentially criminalizing student expression.As institutions across the country continue to scramble to enact policies and procedures in response to the Israel-Hamas war, critics and experts alike voice increasing concern about the secondary, if unintended, consequences of these actions. It remains to be seen how significantly the aftermath will impact free speech and student rights
